League of Legends Wiki:Request for Adminship/Technology Wizard 2
I feel Tech has been a lot more mature since this incident and I feel he will be able to use his admin rights like he was originally meant to do. Tech obviously needs these rights since he has made several things like this and this and with only 1 admin he could definately be placed as an admin on this wiki. --LoLisNumbaWan 07:45, September 10, 2011 (UTC) Support # As nominator--LoLisNumbaWan 07:45, September 10, 2011 (UTC) # He was fine before and I didn't see the reason why his rights where removed. He's a great Moderator and can be a great Admin too. 10:37, September 10, 2011 (UTC) # He's very active and always takes care of vadals nicely. Ivo09 13:03, September 10, 2011 (UTC) # Proactive user and great with the community. # After reconsidering this, what the heck. I'm sure that he won't break anything, and hope that he won't repeat past undesirable actions. 22:45, September 21, 2011 (UTC) # Green always looks good on u Tech, Do not repeat ur previous mistake, ok. [[User:Paul Levesque|'Paul Levesque']] [[User talk:Paul Levesque|'Talk to Me!']] 03:46, September 22, 2011 (UTC) # so many people getting nominated...*sigh*, neon and uber are meanies...but not as mean as nystus...he is the meanie boss...anyway i SUPPORT!!!!FOR A REASON....LongDROP oops i forgot to sign my name..dang these templates # Not really one for politics, especially on a Wiki, but I'll support. ~Krayt88, 04:46, September 22, 2011 (UTC) # I can say he has shaped up to be a lot more responsible but knowing his past I will not support any more second chances if he messes up. He has my support for now. Sagee Prime "You Calm Down the Thunder and I'll Reap the Whirlwind" 17:49, September 22, 2011 (UTC) # Although I heard bad things about him in the past, he seems to have improved considerably based on things I hear around. I think a second chance is appropriate but try not to need another one. --Bachoru, the boss of all bosses 18:17, September 22, 2011 (UTC) # Deserves a second chance. He has contributed so much and shaped up to be someone you can and should trust. 19:41, September 22, 2011 (UTC) # I read up on Tech's demotion, though I feel I can only go by my own experience with Tech. To me, he has been active, kind, and very helpful. And yes, sometimes a tad bit over-zealous when starting new things. Overall he is a positive force for the LoL wiki and deserves a second go as an administrator. My biggest worry is how well Tech and Neon can work together. Should Tech become an admin, I hope those two can put aside any differences they may have and do what's best for the LoL wiki. Cidem1324 00:05, September 23, 2011 (UTC) # As I stated before, the way BBilge went about getting the demotion was silly and immature. 01:27, September 23, 2011 (UTC) # I like it. He's definitely helped me understand the wiki, and he seems responsible enough to have the new rights. EpicNoob!|Talk!| |Face Checking! 02:17, September 23, 2011 (UTC) Neutral # I haven't been around long to see these drama cases, and I haven't talked to Tech much. 07:54, September 22, 2011 (UTC) Oppose # - For the same reason I supported the removal of his admin rights. He's immature and can't take criticism whatsoever. He has prevented wiki progress multiple times due to his own personal problems as a result of his aforementioned immaturity and that is not something I want to see in an admin on this wiki. His Sysop Requests page also highlights his errors such as removing a bot highlight from an account that still has bot rights, adding the wrong color for content directors in the mediawiki, not protecting pages (even those of his own creation) properly, laziness in deleting comments from a vandal, etc. I'll end this with a quote from my post on the removal page "Tech's attitude, especially as an admin, is just completely ridiculous in all accounts. Not only does he act with immaturity [ . . . ] he deals with issues in a hasty, personal bias filled, way, not with a level head that is required of someone with these level of rights" 08:23, September 10, 2011 (UTC) # Pretty much what Neon said. We've already seen how Tech handled the wiki as an administrator and I don't think he's ready to get those powers back yet. 13:23, September 10, 2011 (UTC) #: nothing has changed, and beyond that he is currently being desysopped on pokemon.wikia. 15:02, September 10, 2011 (UTC) #* Not relevant. Please disregard this as we only evaluate a user's behavior on this Wiki. #**I would argue that if a user is proving them-self to be immature and not ready for admin tools anywhere, it should be noted here. 15:29, September 10, 2011 (UTC) #***Moved to support. 22:45, September 21, 2011 (UTC) Comments * This thread should be started by him, since he is the only one to know when to apply to a position back. And If I had to vote I guess I'll say he is still not ready at least from my point of view. Category:Request for adminshipCategory:Inactive rights requests * I respect your vote Aj, but you are not allowed to advertise things that have nothing to do with here. All you are doing is giving me a bad reputation, and if you have no reasoning for me to me an admin here, then I don't think your vote should count at all. You should only vote on this wiki if you have reasoning from this wiki. Otherwise people can just go to other wikis and go ruin their reputation just because they don't have anything else to argue with. I'm sorry but your vote is wrong in so many ways. Like I said, I don't mind that you opposed, but your reasoning is what bothers me. That is just rude and uncalled for. 18:38, 9/10/2011 *:How does the fact that you are still having problems with admin tools have "nothing to do with here"? The people at pokemon.wikia.com seem to be bringing up the same points as in your desysop request here, so I'd say that it is very relevant in showing that nothing has changed since you desysop request here. My reasoning is "from this wiki"; however, in addition to all the evidence I need on your desysop request here, I also have the evidence from your desysop request on another wiki, and I see no reason why that cannot be presented as evidence here. You call my behaviour in raising a legitimate concern "rude and uncalled for". The entire point of the RfA system is to determine whether or not a candidate is ready for the sysop tools. You want a reason for me opposing here? "Nothing has changed" since the desysop request. 22:42, September 10, 2011 (UTC) *::What have I done that is wrong here? 22:43, 9/10/2011 *:::Where were you during your desysop request? Must I really repeat those reasons? 22:45, September 10, 2011 (UTC) *::::I haven't done anything to still be considered immature, I haven't ever abused my rights (even before the demotion), and I don't interact with users that want to start problems. 22:50, 9/10/2011 *:::::I would consider the edit war with the talk page dilema and the following drama that came out of it immature. *:::::::I guess I agree with the drama that came out after it. But it was quickly resolved and I have been a lot calmer now. Also regarding the edit war, the only thing I did wrong was continuing to tango with the other user, I should have taken straight to Kaz. 23:04, 9/10/2011 *Why is this request protected, anyways? 23:34, September 14, 2011 (UTC) *:It is suspended by Kaz until further notice. That's all I currently know anyway. 23:36, 9/14/2011 * Voting will now re-commence. *Uber why would you call them "powers"? They aren't powers of any sort and shouldn't be treated as such. They are privileges that are used to fight vandalism and help out in improving the wiki. 03:59, 9/22/2011 *Neon - It's not that I am lazy to delete the comments, it's that it is way faster and much easier to mass delete them. You even did it yourself right now when there was only 2 comments to delete. Regarding the CD colors, all I can say is, everyone makes mistakes. Finally, regarding the templates, I forgot, what is wrong with being a human? 04:06, 9/22/2011 **And yet I shouldn't have had to, you blocked him for profanity yet left the profanity on the wiki, but I guess you just forgot about that too. Forgetfulness is not a quality I want to see in an administrator, nor do I want my admins consistently making "mistakes." I'm likely not going to make a conversation out of this though, because, unlike most of the editors on this wiki, I see right through your little victim game and it disgusts me. 04:16, September 22, 2011 (UTC) ***I'm in the middle of a match, I'm not going to risk getting reported. I did what I could (while dead), which is block him (stop him from making anymore comments), and then was going to delete them. I'm not playing any game, I am just saying that your arguments seem to be invalid and seem to be biased. 04:31, 9/22/2011 * After reading and re-reading the comments made on this request, there seems to be consensus within the community to return Tech's admin rights to him. As a personal note of caution to Tech, please don't let it get to your head. Beyond that, you no longer need to pester me to do stuff for you :D 02:22, September 23, 2011 (UTC) *:Hooray for no more pestering! 02:23, 9/23/2011